This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the FAQ and RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate and remove the ads - it's free!

Re: No 'him' or 'her'; preschool fights gender bias

Originally Posted by WI Crippler

The great thing about this is that for now, I can still reinforce gender with my kids at home no matter what happens with school cirriculum. And I will. That's not saying I will enforce antiquated roles of homemaking as female or hunting as male. Only that I will enforce the idea of there being males and females, whom are properly referred to as sir, ma'am, his, her, guy, girl, boy lady, woman, man etc.....

Re: No 'him' or 'her'; preschool fights gender bias

Originally Posted by spud_meister

Were your kids Swedes?

no, dey wuz niggas. and sadly they were stereotyped as trouble makers, even though they never caused any trouble. any time anything bad happened, they were the first suspect. that was the primary reason we pulled them. got tired of having to go up and verbally abuse the teacher and admin on a regular basis.

Re: No 'him' or 'her'; preschool fights gender bias

Now, do you see a difference between simply "questioning their value" and "taking pro-active steps to neutralize them for preschoolers?"

I'm not splitting hairs. That's how children learn language. Point stands, constant active intervention, as is needed to deprive a child of gendered pronouns, is not needed for a child to learn normal language. The former is engineering, the latter is a normal process.

There is no more constant active interevention. You are just teaching them to use different pronouns. They are being taught in the same way, by example.

We can promote the social norms that we have applied to gender roles or not. Either way, we are just as guilty of indoctrinating, engineering actively teaching or whatever charged word you want use.

There's a difference between normal interaction and a specific lesson. Children can learn languages via normal interaction with the speakers of a language as they develop without the need for specific lessons. They don't have to be specifically taught the use or meaning of gendered pronouns, they only need exposure to their use in normal interactions and they pick them up.

And they only need exposure to different pronouns and they will pick them up.

The exceptions, as I already mentioned, are irregular forms and such, but that's not the majority of the language. Proper writing and written grammar are taught with specific lessons as well, because they are learned differently than a spoken language. Humans evolved to speak language at an early age, writing, by comparison, is relative new on the scene.

Much of a culture is learned the same way as spoken language. To suppress a part of it, such as nerfing gender roles altogether, requires active intervention (social engineering).

You have not shown that passing on a language or culture with gender pronouns and gender assigned roles is any different than passing on one without them. In many other languages they assign gender to all sorts of things. In English we do not. Is that because English is taught with more active intervention?

Re: No 'him' or 'her'; preschool fights gender bias

There is no more constant active interevention. You are just teaching them to use different pronouns. They are being taught in the same way, by example.

it is intervention to avoid using normal language to push an agenda, or to teach anyone to violate any norm, you can't spin it any other way.

We can promote the social norms that we have applied to gender roles or not. Either way, we are just as guilty of indoctrinating, engineering actively teaching or whatever charged word you want use.

no, we're not, and I've already explained the distinction between the two many times.

And they only need exposure to different pronouns and they will pick them up.

glad you agree w/ me now. they only need exposure.

You have not shown that passing on a language or culture with gender pronouns and gender assigned roles is any different than passing on one without them.

Go ahead and name a single culture that has no gender roles. Obviously, intervention/meddling is necesary to prevent them from being picked up. The same is not true to learn them normally.

In many other languages they assign gender to all sorts of things. In English we do not. Is that because English is taught with more active intervention?

No, that's just a feature of our language-- and the fact that we lost the use of gendered nouns happened on its own, not because of active intervention. In 1000 years, English may have them again.
And in any case, gendered nouns, gendered pronouns, and cultural gender roles are not the same thing. You're grasping at everything now aren't you?

Re: No 'him' or 'her'; preschool fights gender bias

How in the world did you come to the conclusion that this is experimentation? Its stupid and silly, sure, but I can't for the life of me figure out how this could possibly harm a child.

In fact, I don't see any reason to go beyond the stance of "why should I care about this at all?"

It's experimentation because this is typically not done during the child raising period.
The results are, at best, unknown.

Stupid crap like this could spread, when there is no reason for the application.

I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
—Adam Shepard